A way to secure previous art is to apply for a patent.
When you get the first reply which says if the invention is patentable
or not you just stop the process.
In that way you have official dated documents describing the invention.

Here in Denmark I think the first application is around 1000 $.

Jerry Decker - KN wrote:
> Hola Mitch!
> Welcome to the list, you should now be subscribed and this email is
> being posted to the list as you requested.  Comments follow;
> Mitch wrote:
>> * Hello Jerry. This is Mitch, and I am curious about joining the
>> discussion list. I will warn you, however, that I am not really very
>>  'computer literate'. I have trouble just getting this box to send
>> mail.* *  I am interested in bouncing some of my theories off of
>> people. I have been working alone for a long time now, and I think I
>> need some help from people with a knowledge of the 'free energy'
>> subject. Also, I would like to know how to get an idea into the world
>> without some giant corporation sucking it up and squelching it
>> forever. My federal government (patents) will not be of any help,
>> either, with 4900 secret applications denied so far. How does an idea
>> remain in the 'public domain', without the aforementioned problems?
>> Any way, what do I need to sign up?
> That is always an interesting problem but has been looked into by many
> including myself and some in our group. If an inventor wants to put an
> invention in the public domain, he must do it very carefully as there
> are not just groups and some companies out there, including the
> government or agencies in the government that will try to suppress
> it...but there are MANY THIEVES.
> We have experienced this directly with a supposed long term, trusted
> confidant who stole a public domain released device back in 1994. This
> guy actually filed for a patent on it not 3 months later.  He received
> the patent and never told any of us he did it.
> One of the inventors told me about 6 years later that 'my friend' was
> a thief.  I couldn't believe it but sure enough, there in the patents
> was their device, reworked and in this guys name.
> Its a long and painful story...I called him up and read the riot
> act...he defended his lowly actions saying he'd been working on that
> for 30 years...yeah?
> So why patent NOW, after others had done the work and why had he not
> written or discussed this prior to the patent?  Thievery, clear and
> simple...needless to say, a friendship of many years was destroyed and
> all contact with this person broken up.
> The point is, if you release a proof of principle on the net, there
> are those who will steal it..
> If you post an article given in the public domain, into a public venue
> that is dated and known, one year after that, it BECOMES public domain.
> However, that one year prior to becoming public domain, because it is
> public, anyone can read, duplicate and run for a patent which is
> exactly what happened to our two inventor associates back in 1994-1995.
> This led to research into the patent system and how to protect the
> inventors wishes. Links that go into this and offer a solution;
> http://www.keelynet.com/interact/archive/00001928.htm
> http://www.keelynet.com/interact/archive/00002428.htm
> http://www.keelynet.com/interact/archive/00002437.htm
> http://www.keelynet.com/interact/archive/00002430.htm
>> And, h*ere is a thought experiment for you. This would be my first
>> list submission.* *  * *  There is a water tank that is 4 feet deep,
>> 2 feet wide, and 4 feet long. Cut into one of the 2 foot _sides_ is a
>> slot that is 3.5 feet tall, and 6 inches wide. This slot is cut
>> vertically, and begins 3 inches above the bottom, and ends 3 inches
>> below the top. Into this slot fits a wheel that is made of wood, and
>> weighs 50 lbs. This wheel's diameter and width are exactly the same
>> as the slot, so it fits perfectly. In this wheel is an axle, which is
>> connected to the side of the tank, so that the wheel is half in, and
>> half out, of the tank, and the wheel can spin freely. There is a seal
>> between the tank side cutout and the wheel, so that the water, which
>> completely covers one half of the wheel, cannot leak out. Remember,
>> this wheel is inserted into the SIDE of the tank.* *  Will this wheel
>> start to spin? Wood is buoyant, and only one half of the wheel is
>> under water. The half that is out of the water weighs 25 lbs. The
>> half that is under water displaces its weight, so it has a negative
>> weight of 25 lbs. That is a difference of 50 lbs. between the two
>> halves of the wheel. Will the wheel start to spin on its own, under
>> its own gravitational difference?* *  Or will the water treat the
>> wheel half that is in it as if it were only the side of the tank,
>> resulting in no spinning? Theoretically, if one half of the wheel is
>> always lighter than the other half, the wheel should spin as fast as
>> the bearings and seal will allow, if allowed to run freely. * *  I am
>> having some difficulty wrapping my brain around this problem. Perhaps
>> you, can supply me with an answer to this problem. Contact me if you
>> cannot visualize this setup as I have described it, or with any other
>> questions, or with (hopefully), an answer that makes sense. It may be
>> that I have to build the thing to find out the answer.* *Thanks,
>> Mitch* *
> If I'm understanding your description properly, I can't see it
> self-spinning.  Such a device requires overbalance...where it 'falls
> into itself'...no matter whether its wood, buoyancy, weights, etc..
> I drew a diagram based on your description and it appears to me that
> the water being uniformly distributed on the half of the wooden wheel
> in the water, would offer no lift because the wood is uniformly
> covered in water.  I think there is no difference in buoyancy anywhere
> on the half of the wooden wheel that is immersed in the water,
> therefore no motion.
> Plus the wheel is one piece, so I can't see where there could be a
> variation in weight. Its easier to think about as styrofoam or
> something more buoyant. I think a model of this would be a waste of
> time and money, but it is a simple thing to test though I can't see it
> working.
> Tapping into gravity via weight and any other force always requires a
> difference of potential....the greater that difference, the more force
> you can tap.  So size is EVERYTHING for gravity fed devices since you
> need to establish a difference in weight, not really very practical
> nor could I see it producing any useful energy if you could get it to
> work, like the Orffyreus/Bessler wheel.
> Check out the Minto wheel which uses a combination of gravity and
> buoyancy to self-run....its very slow but it does run based on
> temperature differential, weight and phase changes of a refrigerant. 
> See;
> http://www.keelynet.com/energy/minto.htm
> http://www.keelynet.com/minto/minto2.htm
> At any rate, thanks for the idea and welcome to the list.

Reply via email to